* Fun with Linux 2.6.21-rc1
@ 2007-02-23 17:25 Pavel Roskin
2007-02-23 19:59 ` Pavel Roskin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Pavel Roskin @ 2007-02-23 17:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-sparse
Hello!
The current sparse reports many errors with Linux 2.6.21-rc1. There are
screenfuls of errors for every file. I have reduced one of them to this
simple file:
struct st {
char c;
} __attribute__ ((aligned(2)));
struct st s1;
struct st s2;
$ sparse test.c
test.c:5:18: error: Expected ( after asm
test.c:5:18: error: got s2
test.c:5:20: error: Expected ) after asm
test.c:5:20: error: got ;
builtin:0:0: error: expected declaration
The strange thing is that there is no "asm" here at all.
--
Regards,
Pavel Roskin
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread* Re: Fun with Linux 2.6.21-rc1 2007-02-23 17:25 Fun with Linux 2.6.21-rc1 Pavel Roskin @ 2007-02-23 19:59 ` Pavel Roskin 2007-02-23 22:30 ` [PATCH] " Christopher Li 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Pavel Roskin @ 2007-02-23 19:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-sparse, Christopher Li On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 12:25 -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote: > Hello! > > The current sparse reports many errors with Linux 2.6.21-rc1. There are > screenfuls of errors for every file. I have reduced one of them to this > simple file: > > struct st { > char c; > } __attribute__ ((aligned(2))); > struct st s1; > struct st s2; P.S. The breakage has nothing to do to Linux changes. It was caused by the patch called "Make the ptrlist using the sparse allocator". Undoing the patch fixes the problem. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] Re: Fun with Linux 2.6.21-rc1 2007-02-23 19:59 ` Pavel Roskin @ 2007-02-23 22:30 ` Christopher Li 2007-02-24 1:53 ` Pavel Roskin 2007-02-25 22:45 ` exposing __attribute__ portability macros in lib.h; any objections? Josh Triplett 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Christopher Li @ 2007-02-23 22:30 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Pavel Roskin; +Cc: linux-sparse, Josh Triplett On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:59:26PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote: > P.S. The breakage has nothing to do to Linux changes. It was caused by > the patch called "Make the ptrlist using the sparse allocator". Undoing > the patch fixes the problem. > No, that was not it. The bug does not trigger if I remove "-O" or remove the recent struct attribute patch. You make me guilt for 5 mins. But the real bugs is match_idents did not end with NULL. This patch should fix it: Chris Fix a bug that match_idents forget to end with NULL Pavel Roskin manage to hit this bug with struct st { char c; } __attribute__ ((aligned(2))); struct st s1; struct st s2; Signed-Off-By: Christopher Li <sparse@chrisli.org> Index: sparse/parse.c =================================================================== --- sparse.orig/parse.c 2007-02-23 14:33:28.000000000 -0800 +++ sparse/parse.c 2007-02-23 14:36:16.000000000 -0800 @@ -861,7 +861,7 @@ static struct token *handle_attributes(s apply_ctype(token->pos, &thistype, ctype); continue; } - if (match_idents(token, &asm_ident, &__asm_ident, &__asm___ident)) { + if (match_idents(token, &asm_ident, &__asm_ident, &__asm___ident, NULL)) { struct expression *expr; token = expect(token->next, '(', "after asm"); token = parse_expression(token->next, &expr); ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] Re: Fun with Linux 2.6.21-rc1 2007-02-23 22:30 ` [PATCH] " Christopher Li @ 2007-02-24 1:53 ` Pavel Roskin 2007-02-25 22:45 ` exposing __attribute__ portability macros in lib.h; any objections? Josh Triplett 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Pavel Roskin @ 2007-02-24 1:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christopher Li; +Cc: linux-sparse On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 14:30 -0800, Christopher Li wrote: > On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:59:26PM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > P.S. The breakage has nothing to do to Linux changes. It was caused by > > the patch called "Make the ptrlist using the sparse allocator". Undoing > > the patch fixes the problem. > > > > No, that was not it. The bug does not trigger if I remove "-O" or remove > the recent struct attribute patch. > > You make me guilt for 5 mins. But the real bugs is match_idents did not > end with NULL. I understand your patch triggered a bug that was sitting there for more than two years. That's quite rare. Sorry for assuming your guilt. > This patch should fix it: Yes, it's working. Thank you! -- Regards, Pavel Roskin ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* exposing __attribute__ portability macros in lib.h; any objections? 2007-02-23 22:30 ` [PATCH] " Christopher Li 2007-02-24 1:53 ` Pavel Roskin @ 2007-02-25 22:45 ` Josh Triplett 2007-02-26 10:43 ` Christopher Li 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Josh Triplett @ 2007-02-25 22:45 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christopher Li; +Cc: Pavel Roskin, linux-sparse [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 931 bytes --] Christopher Li wrote: > Fix a bug that match_idents forget to end with NULL [...] > Signed-Off-By: Christopher Li <sparse@chrisli.org> [...] > - if (match_idents(token, &asm_ident, &__asm_ident, &__asm___ident)) { > + if (match_idents(token, &asm_ident, &__asm_ident, &__asm___ident, NULL)) { Applied. I'd also like to apply a patch to use __attribute__((__sentinel__)) on match_idents, which would have caught this problem. In order to do so portably, I plan to add a portability macro SENTINEL_ATTR, like the FORMAT_ATTR macro currently in lib.h. However, lib.h currently defines FORMAT_ATTR, uses it for a few prototypes, and then undefines it. Any objections to defining SENTINEL_ATTR and leaving it defined (and probably doing the same for FORMAT_ATTR)? I don't think those would pollute the namespace any more than lib.h already does with position, verbose, info, and similar. - Josh Triplett [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: exposing __attribute__ portability macros in lib.h; any objections? 2007-02-25 22:45 ` exposing __attribute__ portability macros in lib.h; any objections? Josh Triplett @ 2007-02-26 10:43 ` Christopher Li 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Christopher Li @ 2007-02-26 10:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Josh Triplett; +Cc: Pavel Roskin, linux-sparse On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 02:45:29PM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: > Applied. Thanks! > > I'd also like to apply a patch to use __attribute__((__sentinel__)) on > match_idents, which would have caught this problem. In order to do so > portably, I plan to add a portability macro SENTINEL_ATTR, like the > FORMAT_ATTR macro currently in lib.h. However, lib.h currently defines > FORMAT_ATTR, uses it for a few prototypes, and then undefines it. Any > objections to defining SENTINEL_ATTR and leaving it defined (and probably > doing the same for FORMAT_ATTR)? I don't think those would pollute the > namespace any more than lib.h already does with position, verbose, info, and > similar. No objection for __sentinel__ per se. In the long run, I would like to get ride of match_idents completely. I want to define more parser operation function for pre-defined keywords. So it is driven by the symbol table rather than comparing the keyword one by one. It is a big change though. Chris ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-02-26 11:16 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2007-02-23 17:25 Fun with Linux 2.6.21-rc1 Pavel Roskin 2007-02-23 19:59 ` Pavel Roskin 2007-02-23 22:30 ` [PATCH] " Christopher Li 2007-02-24 1:53 ` Pavel Roskin 2007-02-25 22:45 ` exposing __attribute__ portability macros in lib.h; any objections? Josh Triplett 2007-02-26 10:43 ` Christopher Li
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.